Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 12:22:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> To: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> Cc: phk@critter.freebsd.dk (Poul-Henning Kamp), freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Linux emulation scripting fix to be committed to 5.x and 4.x wednesday Message-ID: <200004231922.MAA63538@apollo.backplane.com> References: <200004231913.MAA09141@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
:> :
:> :--
:> :Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
:>
:> I think you're confused, Poul. I've gone over the commits made
:> to the tree by people over the last few months and frankly there
:> are dozens of simultanious -current and -stable commits. A quick
:> check shows that most of them are trivial bug fixes.
:
:And look at how many of them had to be patched, re-merged, etc. IMHO
:people are getting way way to loose with MFC right after a commit. I
:don't even want to see a MFC for a 1 character spelling fixed MFC'ed
:in less than 3 days anymore.
:
:--
:Rod Grimes - KD7CAX @ CN85sl - (RWG25) rgrimes@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net
Perfectly acceptable to me ... *IF* core decides to change the rules
they've made for the current development trees (stable and current)
and makes an official statement that covers everyone rather then just
Matt.
I think the work required to accomplish the BSDI merger is overrated
anyway (in regards to the source tree). I kinda expected the BSDI
people to start working on it immediately but obviously the pace is
going to be a lot slower.
Core should consider reverting the special rules that were originally
created with the expectation of major breakage in 5.x back to
the set of rules we had for 3.x and 4.x.
-Matt
Matthew Dillon
<dillon@backplane.com>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200004231922.MAA63538>